Current Events > Oregon raises the Age limit to purchase Nicotine products to 21

(+) Yeah! (+)

It doesn't go into effect until next year, but stores are already adhering to the new law.

I remember about 12 yeas ago, in Government class the teacher gave us a debate project as to whether or not laws will ever get tighter on the age of tobacco consumption. Ultimately, every argument in FAVOR of raising the law was shot down by the teacher, who said and I quote "If you are old enough to serve the country in War, than you are old enough to smoke a cigerette."

Now that lobbyist were capable of pushing for a 21+ ban, how do you feel about this?
I am a smoker, but I feel that America is moving away from the old image of tobacco being upperclass and glamorous. As this trend moves on, I assume tobacco will be phased out.

Which is strange since this country was literally founded on the commercial success of the Tobacco plant.
---

thank you nanny state for making decisions for me
---

weekoldhotdog posted...

"If you are old enough to serve in the country in War, than you are old enough to smoke a cigerette."

In California where this already happened 18 year old service members can still buy tobacco.
---

seems dumb but also I am not surprised
---

Fishy posted...

weekoldhotdog posted...

"If you are old enough to serve in the country in War, than you are old enough to smoke a cigerette."

In California where this already happened 18 year old service members can still buy tobacco.

Yeah, it's age old knowledge that cheap cigs can be bought at military bases. Federal Law supercedes state law on Federal land, which is still only 18+
---

Fishy posted...

weekoldhotdog posted...

"If you are old enough to serve in the country in War, than you are old enough to smoke a cigerette."

In California where this already happened 18 year old service members can still buy tobacco.

Sounds like an exception written into the law, since another state, Hawaii, also raised the legal age to purchase tobacco products so military there has to be 21 as well.

I mean, I guess it's alright. People who really want to smoke are still going to find ways to get cigarettes and they're going to start at a younger age than 18 anyway. I'm just wondering if we're going to get to the point where they are in Russia where they just made a blanket cut-off for everyone born after a certain date - people born after that date will never be able to purchase tobacco products in the RF.
---

doesn't bother me. should be 18 if they want to smoke. it's someone's decision long as they don't smoke it around me.
---

weekoldhotdog posted...

Now that lobbyist were capable of pushing for a 21+ ban, how do you feel about this?

What about the conscription age?

I'm not a smoker, but I think it's silly to arbitrarily add 3 years to the legal adult age for buying a substance you plan to put in your own body. I feel the same way about alcohol.

But I guess some people will make a lot of money off the black market
---

die for your country at 18

can't light up until 21

ok then.
---

To be fair, moderate / rational alcohol consumption at least has scientifically backed health benefits. Smoking does nothing for you >_>. I say that as someone who smokes.
---

Good
---

myzz7 posted...

die for your country at 18

can't light up until 21

ok then.

Get tried for murder as an adult, at 12.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/youngest-children-adults-1st-degree-murder-released/story?id=32644967

Hexenherz posted...

Sounds like an exception written into the law, since another state, Hawaii, also raised the legal age to purchase tobacco products so military there has to be 21 as well.

It's the other way around; Hawaii's military bases decided to support the ban. It's only legal for service members to buy it on base in California, they'll get in trouble off base. So in Hawaii the bases just made it a rule not to sell to under 21 personnel as well.
---

Oregon sucks

(I'm all for getting rid of nicotine and cigarettes though, just why not do away with it completely, teens already have illegal means of obtaining them so what's raising the minimum age supposed to do)
---

WilliamPorygon posted...

Oregon sucks

(I'm all for getting rid of nicotine and cigarettes though, just why not do away with it completely, teens already have illegal means of obtaining them so what's raising the minimum age supposed to do)

Do you have any idea what sort of disaster a tobacco ban will be?

WilliamPorygon posted...

Oregon sucks

(I'm all for getting rid of nicotine and cigarettes though, just why not do away with it completely, teens already have illegal means of obtaining them so what's raising the minimum age supposed to do)

Because then we'd just have prohibition 2.0. If you want to get rid of something like this, you have to keep making it more and more inconvenient until people quit on there own.

Tsukasa1891 posted...

WilliamPorygon posted...

Oregon sucks

(I'm all for getting rid of nicotine and cigarettes though, just why not do away with it completely, teens already have illegal means of obtaining them so what's raising the minimum age supposed to do)

Because then we'd just have prohibition 2.0. If you want to get rid of something like this, you have to keep making it more and more inconvenient until people quite on there own.

Or, you know, discover an alternative nicotine delivery mechanism that isn't quite so cancerous.
That may or may not have happened already.

Consumption will go down, the state will freak out that they're losing revenue and hike cigarette taxes.

It says right on the damn box "These things will kill your ass." If people still want to use them at that point, then let them.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

Tsukasa1891 posted...

WilliamPorygon posted...

Oregon sucks

(I'm all for getting rid of nicotine and cigarettes though, just why not do away with it completely, teens already have illegal means of obtaining them so what's raising the minimum age supposed to do)

Because then we'd just have prohibition 2.0. If you want to get rid of something like this, you have to keep making it more and more inconvenient until people quite on there own.

Or, you know, discover an alternative nicotine delivery mechanism that isn't quite so cancerous.
That may or may not have happened already.

Yeah but wasn't the FDA going to enact some hardcore rules on the alternative delivery mechanisms, making it prohibitively expensive for small and even medium size businesses to maintain their business in that industry?
---

WilliamPorygon posted...

Oregon sucks

(I'm all for getting rid of nicotine and cigarettes though, just why not do away with it completely, teens already have illegal means of obtaining them so what's raising the minimum age supposed to do)

This line of thinking is so futile. "Why have laws, people are just going to break them anyway!" Well. Sure. People will breaks laws. But laws are not magical spells that prevent people from doing things. They are there to discourage people from doing things. And they work.
---

Hexenherz posted...

Yeah but wasn't the FDA going to enact some hardcore rules on the alternative delivery mechanisms, making it prohibitively expensive for small and even medium size businesses to maintain their business in that industry?

Now we're getting into puritans ruining everything, again.
Strange that it was a democrat administration pushing it at the time.

myzz7 posted...

die for your country at 18

can't light up until 21

ok then.

I mean I agree its dumb but the argument really shouldnt be how young is young enough for cigarettes. Just get rid of them. What do they really do? At least with weed and alcohol you get a temporary feeling which makes it justifiable in the right context. With Cigarettes is the feeling given to you really worth all the other bull shit poison that comes with it?
---

TheVipaGTS posted...

myzz7 posted...

die for your country at 18

can't light up until 21

ok then.

I mean I agree its dumb but the argument really shouldnt be how young is young enough for cigarettes. Just get rid of them. What do they really do? At least with weed and alcohol you get a temporary feeling which makes it justifiable in the right context. With Cigarettes is the feeling given to you really worth all the other bull shit poison that comes with it?

Hey guys, great idea, let's ban alcohol! No more drinking and driving!

...oh wait
---

bover_87 posted...

TheVipaGTS posted...

myzz7 posted...

die for your country at 18

can't light up until 21

ok then.

I mean I agree its dumb but the argument really shouldnt be how young is young enough for cigarettes. Just get rid of them. What do they really do? At least with weed and alcohol you get a temporary feeling which makes it justifiable in the right context. With Cigarettes is the feeling given to you really worth all the other bull shit poison that comes with it?

Hey guys, great idea, let's ban alcohol! No more drinking and driving!

...oh wait

How did you get that from what I said at all?
---

It was raised to 21 here a couple of years ago. It sucked having to wait again, but it really isn't hard to find someone else who can buy them.

I also never checked, does anyone know if it's just raising the purchase age or usage as well?
---

KStateKing17 posted...

It was raised to 21 here a couple of years ago. It sucked having to wait again, but it really isn't hard to find someone else who can buy them.

I also never checked, does anyone know if it's just raising the purchase age or usage as well?

both. cops around here will take pack away if they find out they're underage and then crush the cigarette pack on the ground. i seen it happen.
---

kingdrake2 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

It was raised to 21 here a couple of years ago. It sucked having to wait again, but it really isn't hard to find someone else who can buy them.

I also never checked, does anyone know if it's just raising the purchase age or usage as well?

both. cops around here will take pack away if they find out they're underage and then crush the cigarette pack on the ground. i seen it happen.

Shouldn't the cop then have to write up a ticket for them self for littering?

Tsukasa1891 posted...

kingdrake2 posted...

KStateKing17 posted...

It was raised to 21 here a couple of years ago. It sucked having to wait again, but it really isn't hard to find someone else who can buy them.

I also never checked, does anyone know if it's just raising the purchase age or usage as well?

both. cops around here will take pack away if they find out they're underage and then crush the cigarette pack on the ground. i seen it happen.

Shouldn't the cop then have to write up a ticket for them self for littering?

nope.
---

*shrugs*
---

Fishy posted...

weekoldhotdog posted...

"If you are old enough to serve in the country in War, than you are old enough to smoke a cigerette."

In California where this already happened 18 year old service members can still buy tobacco.

but not alcohol...cuz reasons
---